Image Quality and Framebuffer Speculations for WIP/alpha/beta/E3 games *Read the first post*

I confirmed 960x704 QAA for R3. Sorry, I meant there was nothing new to say otherwise. I misread his question.
 
I confirmed 960x704 QAA for R3. Sorry, I meant there was nothing new to say otherwise. I misread his question.

QAA too :???: not sound good for the sharpness this combination... if the 3D start to compromise even the 2D res, I'm starting to worry about the ps3 games...
 
ign has direct captures so thats probably close to what it looks. although they do compress their images but thats only because alot of people direct link to them.
 
Well, it's not perfect. You can still see the edge aliasing, but I was thinking it's just a very tiny downscaling rather the image size equating to true framebuffer resolution.
 
For analysis, the best would be edges where any post processing AA fails, otherwise it's pointless to analyze for resolution specifically.
 
the AA is definitively pretty interesting
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYfNBCHYHFE&hd=1

Very hard to say imho, too much frenetic & short to have a clear opinion. By the way look a step back compared halo reach how someone has said previously (well not same developers). but I'm not talking of native framebuffer which count relatively for an impressive graphic (at least judging even resistance 3 where I'm quite impressed afterall so subhd / 'disgraceful' render) I admit, I was more impressed by the capture than from that video: there are a lot of things which appears too much outdated to me (even for a 'remade'). Will see when it coming out.
 
Very hard to say imho, too much frenetic & short to have a clear opinion. By the way look a step back compared halo reach how someone has said previously (well not same developers). but I'm not talking of native framebuffer which count relatively for an impressive graphic (at least judging even resistance 3 where I'm quite impressed afterall so subhd / 'disgraceful' render) I admit, I was more impressed by the capture than from that video: there are a lot of things which appears too much outdated to me (even for a 'remade'). Will see when it coming out.

it looks outdated bcause it is indeed outdated. it's a 10 years old game with a new skin slapped on top of it. physics, geometry, ai, animations... even glitches, are the same as 10 years ago :D
 
Environment geometry is quite a bit higher in a lot of cases. The comparison images at the halo site make that very clear. The only polycounts that look old are the warthog and the needler as far as I could tell. The characters are all using new geometry or updated Reach models including textures.

Building the new geometry on top of the old one does impose artistic limitations - they don't add items where they didn't exist before, but they can still alter the environment quite a bit. Just compare the Forerunner structures on the island.

The audio has also all been re-recorded aside from the voice acting, and you can tell from just the few sounds in the new trailer.
 
not good enough for Al to do his magic, I guess?
Anyway it looks very clean from those shots... fxaa?

There's a high possibility given the comment about FXAA from the one 343 Industries developer on twitter. That said, the footage I have seen so far indicates some sort of post-process that seems to work fairly well on Silent Cartographer. It's quite obvious when they switch between old and new footage. In the Halo Waypoint reveal footage, it seemed to fail a couple times inside Truth and Reconciliation, though it might be failed detection or just old footage.
 
if only someone cam update halo reach with FXAA..... the ghosting effect is the only thing that ruins the great visual in the game.
 
Back
Top